Tolerance cannot be measured in terms of degrees of intolerance. I am essentially opposed to burning books even when they incite others to violence. But freedom is either an absolute or it is conditioned on not inciting others to violence. Anything else is rationalized bigotry.

Search This Blog

Saturday, May 25, 2013

Stephen Hawking and the Academic Fallacy

Stephen Hawking represents the fallacy that Class
consciousness brings to any rational discussion. Altruism is a rare thing in
society perhaps because even what we see as self-sacrifice is far too often determined
by ego.We cynically assume
self-interest to be the guiding impulse behind the actions of most people.We adduce mutual respect from the
disadvantaged to whom we shower our compassion and our generosity and believe
the excuses that we are given when they fail the test of tolerance; because we
want to see in everyone the values we ourselves practice.And we bestow innocence upon our academic
masters that few of them deserve.We
remember with fondness our early teachers (perhaps even our first crush) and with
respect endow our later instructors with the gift of honesty, integrity and
selflessness that few are ever able to attain.Their depth of knowledge is assumed to be encyclopedic in spite of
evidence to the contrary – we trust them with our unthinking and benevolent
faith in education.

This is where the education system has betrayed
us all.By attributing the properties of
a polymath to all our academics we cushion them from criticism because of the
assumption that they not only know it all, but also that they are actually capable
of joining all the dots into a coherent pattern.People like Professor Stephen Hawking are awarded
added gravitas because at least in his case, he has overcome (with Israeli
help) his significant disabilities.But
we therefore forget, until rudely reminded, that an inconvenient truth exists: the
disabled are just like us, with the same character flaws and prejudices.

Racists, religious bigots and political
fascists (my favourite demons), are nevertheless provided with a cover when
they teach our young. We assume a purity of vision that is without
justification.Worse, we give them
respect, a salary and after a few years, tenure! This, we do, regardless of
their competence or academic allegiance to the truth.The central issue is that it is not possible
to dilute the spread of venom throughout the body politic when the poisoners
are in charge of quality control. Unprejudiced peer review does not, nor can
it, exist, within a single institution.

There has been much written about S Hawking's
boycott of Israel.
Most of it either examines the man from his academic pedestal or is distracted
by the initial confusion over his actions (did he boycott or didn’t he? He
did).

My first point is this: To show up this hypocrite
for his use of Israeli technology is absurd. We live in a networked world and
very little of what we produce, anywhere, is uniquely ours. Even the Israeli
software through which Hawking communicates with the outside world is simply a part
of the technological legacy of our modern human endeavour.To ascribe a unique Israeli characteristic to
it is simply wrong.

In Britain
(and not just in Britain
- it is a disease of European Society), if a person of known Jewish faith
performs a service that is worthy of commendation; the action may be reported,
but never in terms of their attachment to Judaism.If a person known to be Jewish commits an act
of shame or worse, a criminal act for which they are caught, it will be inevitably
highlighted by the national and in fact the international press. It is
sometimes difficult to recall past cases of journalistic ignominy and the
British press is good at dismissing allegations of antisemitism.But it is also highly proficient at providing
sound bites that intermittently pierce the flesh of the Jewish community.Britain’s libel laws are designed
so that only individuals who are personally affected may complain to the police,
even when the activity of journalists sullies the reputation of the community.And it rarely exposes other faith communities
to the degree that it permits the Jewish community to be attacked.

We therefore fight the wrong fight when we
argue that Hawking should not utilise all means at his disposal (irrespective
of their point of origin) to survive and teach his craft.It makes us sound ungrateful (for what you
may ask?) even mean spirited!This is
not a winnable argument.

To accuse him of being a hypocrite is also foolish.
How many of us can honestly not admit to this flaw in our character? It is the
accusation of a child who has discovered his or her idol is not the perfect
human being they assumed them to be. It is a revelation for the child and
perhaps it is even a hurtful barb that nicks the parental ego, but it is not a
crime.Few people are ever able to
reconcile wholly their beliefs with their everyday behaviour. And if we tried
to justify our personal inconsistencies the attempt would likely destroy us.

So let us start again.

A statement published with Hawking’s approval
(by BICUP, a British committee that actively supports the destruction of the
Jewish State) said that “his independent decision to respect the boycott (was) based
upon his knowledge of Palestine,
and on the unanimous advice of his own academic contacts there.”

Mr Hawking is a fool. I.e. He is a silly person
who lacks judgement or sense.We cannot
be good at everything.Even the greatest
minds can be flawed if they practice sloppy and uninformed
thinking.Groupthink,
over-simplification and mental laziness are all that is required to blind
people and nations to their own deteriorating morality.Academic myopia is the new dogma for the
faithful followers of universal rights to which they nail but a select few
causes to their banner.

So a few facts for Professor Hawking: The ‘Palestinian
issue’ is the creation of the United Nations without which we could dream, the
world would focus its attention on some of the real criminal regimes like Somalia and Sudan,
Iran, Syria and Egypt.There are plenty of fratricidal, misogynistic
and illegitimate regimes that terrorise not only their own populations but also
contaminate other nations through their contacts abroad.Israel is not one of them but it is
the only Jewish State so the disproportionate attention it receives is an everyday
reminder of western, universal values of art and culture, ethics and science
that people like the professor would like to see discredited. By buying into misinformed
propaganda we accept the whole package without needing to consider the
consequences.It is the antithesis of
the intellectual endeavour.

The Palestinian Problem is one of the few
genuine international conspiracies of the Twentieth Century.And the Arab people have been its primary
beneficiaries through the catechism they created, prescribing the way every
interaction with Israel
or Jews is conducted; behaviour that has been enthusiastically embraced by the
left and their liberal allies.

Far worse humanitarian crises exist in Mr
Hawking’s world but he chooses to focus on the State of Israel.To my knowledge Stephen has never commented
on the genocide in Darfur, the slave trade in Mali
(and throughout the Arab world) or the sweat-shop nations like China and Pakistan without which we would all
of us be considerably less comfortable but ethically more virtuous.He has perhaps uttered a word or two of
distress about the suffering of homosexuals and Baha’i in Iran; well actually no, but he has visited Iran as he has China, which persecutes its captive
Tibetan population.Tibet has an ancient history which
includes an empire.They have been
repeatedly invaded and persecuted by their Chinese neighbour.Tibet has been under Chinese occupation
for 62 years.

Palestinian Arabs have persecuted their Jewish
brothers and sisters and have repeatedly collaborated in the attempted extermination
of their Jewish neighbours; they have refused to recognise the equality or even
the humanity of their Jewish rivals.And
BDS leaders (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) have consistently admitted they
are neither in favour of reconciliation nor do they support peace with Israel, unless
that is, peace is no more than a short stage on the road to dismemberment of
the State.

The situation is therefore more nuanced than
Hawking and his ilk are prepared to sanction.Ignorance or intellectual cowardice is never a good quality to discover
in those who pretend to make a living from exercising their minds for
humanities benefit.

Do not expect Mr Hawking to apologise to Israel. There
are 1,500 million Muslims and 1,350 million Chinese (including Tibet).Even if a small percentage only, provides patronage
to Britain,
it greases the palms of academia who in their turn will always forgive their sins.
If there is a failure, it is that we continue to believe that a long term
relationship with these universities is in our best interests. It is not. Worse
than putting all your eggs in one basket is to pretend that a society which has
always celebrated its class divisions will not give in to its traditional
prejudices.

To quote one article “In Palestinian
Arab society, the most famous disabled person was Hamas founder and arch
murderer Ahmed Yassin. In Iraq,
terrorists use disabled women for suicide attacks.” Omar Barghouti, a founder
of the BDS movement (and one of its most vocal, high profile leaders) studied
for his PHD at the Jewish, Zionist University of Tel Aviv, Israel.Why would the ignorant professor Hawking listen
to those whose political and religious hatred empowers them to support the
destruction of the only free Western country in the Near East and the only
country where Arabs can literally realize anything they wish to achieve?

We have struggled over the centuries to develop
an ethical system that is appropriate for us. Why are we now showing such
obsequiousness to those who are intent on its destruction?

Mr Hawking is an intelligent idiot who listened
to one side only and then made his decision based on his prejudices. Reject him
and the institution that nurtures his noxious ignorance.Ignore him.And yes, a bit of intelligence in how we initiate damage control would
be a welcome change in our behaviour.